I'm a healthcare worker, so I'm not immersed in this world at all. I can only speak as person who has to use the oven, but doesn't get to pick which oven is purchased.
My bosses don't buy the ovens that are the most dependable, the most efficient, nor ones that are even compatible with the other steps in the cooking process.
They're impressed by the AI oven that cooks the pizza mostly right 30-40% of the time. "It'll be more consistent if you let the oven decide how long to cook." But we ignore that because of how stupid it is.
They buy ovens that suck because sales people impress them with baking jargon they don't understand. At least, that's how it comes off when they talk about it. I'm sure getting a good deal is a much bigger factor than they say.
They don't eat pizza. They can't even tell whether it's burnt. They tell me "soon the oven will do everything for us and you won't be needed."
They don't seem to comprehend that an oven can't knead dough or mix ingrdients. And that's even ignoring the fact that the auto-cook features are wrong except in the best of conditions.
The ovens break constantly because of the humidity levels needed to keep the dough nice. They spend more on repairs than they ever did on the ovens. We keep telling them to get the moisture-resistant ovens. They say it's too expensive.
I replayed Luigi's Mansion during a long flight the other day, and my wife looked over my shoulder and went "That game looks cool. Is it new?"
This is exactly why Nintendo games tend to have strong legacies. Everyone back then could see realistic graphics just on the horizon, but they weren't there yet. Nintendo knew that the play experience is the important thing, and made art and designs that work within the limitations. Luigi's Mansion, Wind Waker, Super Mario Sunshine, and Pikmin all still look and feel so good.
That's the balance I'm finding it very hard to strike when talking to my family about doctors.
Everyone is either a "all doctors are scams" QAnon type, or they blindly trust everything their doctor says, no matter how fishy, in fear of coming off as one of the former group.
And, to use a phrase we all hate by now, you're absolutely right. When most people have to go into debt to even see a doctor, what can people possibly conclude from that besides "all doctors are out to scam you?"
> But how do you do it in a way that it isn’t a burden on the parents
You make it a burden on the parents, like all parenting always has been.
In my opinion, US culture losing sight of this is part of why our country is spinning down the drain. Combining Ipad kids with "what do you mean my child is failing? Isn't it your job to fix that?" I suspect has lead to a populace that can't think for themselves.
Being willing to give up your online anonymity to be surveiled online and not only beliving it's not a problem, but really thinking it's to protect children is another result of this.
A second opinion is a smart move if one has doubts about their diagnosis. Doctors make mistakes, and even though I've worked with countless great doctors, I've never worked a job where there wasn't at least one who was undiscerning, or downright lazy and negligent. It's hard to tell people to trust their doctor when I know there are plenty of doctors out there like this.
But AI as of right now is worse than any bad doctor I've ever worked with.
I don't completely understand what you mean, but I can tell you for my job, having AI tell you how to get the images is (without exaggeration) like putting someone who's never played an instrument on stage and saying "don't worry, the AI will show you how to do it."
Any comment that doesn't start with this or similar qulaification should be taken with a grain of salt (yes, including this one).
Medical imaging is one of those things everyone thinks is simple because they don't know what they don't know. I'm a cardiac sonographer, and I have to assume radiologists hear at least as many eye-rolling takes on AI coming for their job as I do.
I'm a traveling healthcare worker, which means every 3 months is both a new contract for work and a new lease for a rental to stay at.
So if I'm not willing to complete several hours of training modules uncompensated and before the start date of my contract, I'm within my rights to refuse. But this violation of most states' codes is common practice, and when I inform a new workplace that I'm not going to do it, they tell me it's "required," and the part they're careful not to put in writing is that my contract will be canceled if I make a fuss (there is almost always a clause in these contracts saying they can cancel any time for any reason).
So just move onto the next job, right? But the market is very feast-or-famine. It's just not smart to assert my rights during one of the famine periods.
Similarly, if I'm not willing to sign a lease for a rental saying my landlord is entitled to seize and sell all of my property for being even a minute late on rent, I've now considerably limited my housing options, which is not good when I have a new job that starts in two weeks. If that landlord then goes and tells all their landlord friends that I'm "difficult," I could be completely fucked.
Rentals are exactly what I was talking about. Supposedly you can always go to someone else, but we all know in practice we can't just go without housing and if everyone decides you're "difficult," you're SOL.
Earlier this week a potential landlord offered me a lease saying I had already inspected the property and found no issues with it.
I asked for a chance to actually inspect before signing, and even said I would settle for a good quality video walkthrough. They told me the unit was "not available for viewing" because it wasn't finished yet, and by the time it was finished it would likely be taken.
So why did you ask me to sign a contract saying I inspected a property that it's conceptually impossible to inspect??
I asked if they could change that part of the lease. They said they were "unable" due to "demand and interest in the property."
I'm glad it all worked out for this individual. I hope more people live their lives like this as the dystopia progresses.
Unfortunately, especially in the US, exercising your rights, or even just reading every paper you're expected to put your name to, not only constantly pisses people off for some reason, but also puts you at a significant disadvantage compared to the people that never push back in the interest of not making waves, or even because "whatever it's fine."
If the world flipped a switch tomorrow and now all advertising is independent creators asking fans to donate to their patreon, I would be ecstatic.
It's so much less annoying, intrusive, and generally dystopian than the world's largest corporations listening in on my phone calls so they can serve me minute-long ads for things I already bought that are intentionally as maximalistic and attention-grabbing as possible.
When a creator asks me to buy them a coffee, but they don't do commercials or other sponsorships, how can I be annoyed by that? Their work has value, they're not being unreasonable.
I agree. That's why I was careful to mention that I'm still trying to stay informed about things I think will actually affect me personally.
If the only thing that changes from me reading headlines is my emotional state and not my decisions, I'm going to just stop with the headlines because they exacerbate anxiety and insomnia and my family needs my attention more.
I think being constantly outraged over stuff happening to no one I personally know for twenty years that will never affect my daily life has become too exhausting for me to keep it up, and I'm not convinced my learning about it is helping anyone. It's not changing how I vote.
Apply whatever insult you want to it, but I'm finished.
Making a data center in my home town? I'm going to do anything I can to stop it.
Entertainment companies serving slop instead of art? Meh, I'll just rewatch old favorites.
Okay, didn't mean to come out swinging, just a habit on internet forums anymore I guess.
To try to discuss more productively: I already thought Monet was overrated, and this was a long-held and considered opinion, not just a knee-jerk reaction to this post.
The post seemed to serve as a pepsi-challenge that confirmed what I already thought, but you're right that it's all cherrypicked anyway. That's the part I didn't consider so carefully.
My bosses don't buy the ovens that are the most dependable, the most efficient, nor ones that are even compatible with the other steps in the cooking process.
They're impressed by the AI oven that cooks the pizza mostly right 30-40% of the time. "It'll be more consistent if you let the oven decide how long to cook." But we ignore that because of how stupid it is.
They buy ovens that suck because sales people impress them with baking jargon they don't understand. At least, that's how it comes off when they talk about it. I'm sure getting a good deal is a much bigger factor than they say.
They don't eat pizza. They can't even tell whether it's burnt. They tell me "soon the oven will do everything for us and you won't be needed."
They don't seem to comprehend that an oven can't knead dough or mix ingrdients. And that's even ignoring the fact that the auto-cook features are wrong except in the best of conditions.
The ovens break constantly because of the humidity levels needed to keep the dough nice. They spend more on repairs than they ever did on the ovens. We keep telling them to get the moisture-resistant ovens. They say it's too expensive.